Welcome to Talk Classical - A community covering every aspect of classical music!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community you will have access to post topics, upload content and access many other features. Registration is absolutely free so please, join our classical music forums!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Please correct me if I'm wrong for I know you're a senior member (2000 posts) and I'm just a rookie (less than 20 posts) but I thought Talk Classical is a forum for people to express their musical tastes and opinions. If it is not their taste and opinions that are causing a decline in quality as well as making you sick, what is it then?

I think you are right. I guess, it wasn't a good idea to come here. i thought I could contribute for you to better know the real Tchaikovsky... But...you are right, not here....

My perception is: here we come to learn and to share. You don't want to learn... Just to Be here. Your choice.
Junior once, junior always.

Hey, if you don't like the Nutcracker, whatever...but the reason it is so successful (even today) is because people like it. And I'd like to think that it's not a bad thing that composers compose something for the masses. And for that reason, I will unabashedly think that the Nutcracker is a wonderful piece.

B.M. Music Theory - University of Connecticut
M.M. Music Theory - College-Conservatory of Music at the University of Cincinnati (in process)My Soundclick Page - feel free to browse my compositions I post up there

Not at all. They are all novice here. Tchaikovsky composed 10 operas, 10 operas... They speak about the awful Nutcracker and swan lake, ballets that the composer confessed he composed to make some money, they are corny, simple. These compositions plus 1812 overture are irrelevant.
Of course I won't participate. I know too well ALL Tchaikovsky's huge production. I find this just not interesting. There were other threads in the past a bit more serious. I think the quality of talkclassical is in decline like everything else.

Martin

This forum is called "TalkClassical" not "ClassicalMusicExperts" One does NOT need to hear a million recordings or the complete output of any single composer to enjoy conversing here. Instead of criticizing people why don't YOU open up a discussion about some of his other works that you treasure, and maybe even link to those specific recordings or sound samples?

This forum is called "TalkClassical" not "ClassicalMusicExperts" One does NOT need to hear a million recordings or the complete output of any single composer to enjoy conversing here. Instead of criticizing people why don't YOU open up a discussion about some of his other works that you treasure, and maybe even link to those specific recordings or sound samples?

I did so, I have never said I was an expert, yes my little expertise is in Russian music and I read two big books about Tchaikovsky and I learned a lot. I like very much to read, and incidentaly, I learn. For me reading is essential. I read about what I have said, i do not want to denigrate anybody because we have different tastes, I accept that, I respect that. I cannot be respected if I can't offer the same respect. There is a whole thread about Tchaikovsky's operas, a very important part of his output. I read about his ballets he composed because he was broke... This was before the Baronese von Meck

Not at all. They are all novice here. Tchaikovsky composed 10 operas, 10 operas... They speak about the awful Nutcracker and swan lake, ballets that the composer confessed he composed to make some money, they are corny, simple. These compositions plus 1812 overture are irrelevant.

He also said he didn't like the 1812 because it was composed "without heart". You know what he did write with heart? Fatum. A dreadful overture - probably the worst I have ever heard by a serious composer that I like. It was only after it appeared in public that he changed his mind about it. So what if Tchaikovsky didn't like them? In fact, it may well be that these pieces (1812, swan lake etc.) are so good (yes good, not just popular) is just because he wrote them with detachment - not caring about them so intimately, giving him a more musical perspective. It's a thought anyway - I believe he disliked his fifth symphony for a period as well. He obviously had somewhat strange opinions on his own pieces in general.

Many good things have been written because people were broke. Beethoven's late sonatas (maybe quartets as well) were written "just for money". No-one is going to seriously say these are irrelevant compositions. Dostoevsky wrote Crime and Punishment while on the run from his debtors (sorry to deviate from music but it sprang to mind). He may have harnessed his genius for the purpose of making money, but does that make the pieces less legitimate than if he harnessed it for his personal expression? He wrote them either way - he is remembered for his great musical talents, not his sufferings. Mozart wrote lots (if not all) his pieces for money. Bach and Haydn wrote music because it was their job to do so. Music is to be judged on its artistic merit not the composer's perception of them - however interesting and important that may be.

I am writing in general defense of his 'popular' pieces. I could go on. I won't. I don't insult the pieces you put forward.